Peters for President
Jeffrey B. Peters for President

The American people are looking for something that money can't buy. They are looking for integrity. They are looking for a leader they can trust and believe in. They are looking for someone who will stand up to big money and the special interests - someone who will do what's right for America.

I am that person. I intend to earn your trust. Follow me, and together we can take back our country, and return this government to its rightful owners - you, the people. We The People, respecting our Constitution, can once again form a "more perfect union."

Peters for President and We The People's Positions on Issues during the 2000 election

Campaign Finance Reform:

Do you know how much it costs to run for political office? An average of $360 million to become President, $6 million for Senate, and $600,000 for a seat in Congress. Special interests invested $2.2 billion in campaign contributions for the Presidential and Congressional elections of 1996. Those same special interests received $125 billion worth of benefits for their campaign contributions, or a 50:1 rate of return on their investments, according to Time Magazine's special 4 part series in November of 1998. That means when you go to pay your taxes April 15,th approximately $1,000 (one thousand dollars) of your Federal tax bill goes to pay for these benefits as tax relief and government contracts for special interests (ie. large corporations, wealthy individuals, and big labor unions). Doesn't that make you angry? $1,000 of your taxes is going to the special interests!

For a mere $10 (ten dollars) per taxpayer, We The People can buy back our / your representatives from the special interests by a means of "public financing of all House and Senate elections" - this means Clean Money Campaign Reform for all House and Senate elections, as well as the Presidential election. That's a saving of $990 - versus the $1,000 we currently pay (without being asked if we want to pay it) to the special interests when we pay our Federal Taxes.

Clean Money Campaign Reform is on the people's minds - we need to take back our country and demand that our elected representatives address this issue and vote for the reforms necessary! This is your country, our country - and we want it back!

The Direct Democracy Initiative would put you, the people, back in charge of our democracy - would put in place at the Federal level what already exists in 24 States - the right of the people to make laws by means of the initiative and referendum process. The right has its roots in the Preamble to the Constitution which reads in part: "We The People of the United States do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." See:

The Direct Democracy Initiative in no way replaces our representative system of government - it just complements it. If big money and special interests prevent our representative government from acting, then the people can act by the initiative and referendum process. That is what happened when Maine, Arizona, and Massachusetts all passed Campaign Finance Reform for statewide elections by means of the initiative and referendum process. Via the initiative and referendum process, Campaign Finance Reform was on the ballot in Missouri, New Mexico, and Oregon on election day 2000.

The Direct Democracy Initiative joins Campaign Finance Reform, Term Limits and Full Employment at a "livable wage"as an approved issue for We The People. (We The People is organized as a democracy - one person, one vote; and for an issue to be approved, it must be approved by 66% of the Members who choose to vote. The Direct Democracy Initiative was approved by 97% of the voters.)

Other Issues under consideration by the membership of We The People:

  1. Catastrophic Health Insurance: we need catastrophic health insurance for all so that no one will be forced into bankruptcy or poverty, due to unexpected and expensive illness(es).

  2. Education Reform: the need for minimum standards (all across the US) which are high enough to put students at an advantage in life versus a disadvantage. (Note: We need to rethink the definition of what a good education is and what form it takes; we need to rethink the industrial revolution "time clock" model.) These reforms might include smaller class sizes (ie. 15:1 versus 30 or 40:1); year around classes (so the student's family has the choice of which quarter, if any, to take off for personal fulfillment, travel or alternative study); vouchers so all students have equal opportunity (not a guarantee of equal outcome); requirement of teachers to take on-going training and classes; set-up of an experimental privatized educational system as an alternative to public education and the governmental bureaucracy that it creates; organize a think-tank whose mandate would be to start at the beginning, rethink what the goals of education are, and public education in particular. This group should have free reign to be a creative as possible - to "think outside the box." Its purpose is to put together a proposed restructuring of our education system which will be of service to all children in the US, educating them with excellence and nurturing them to become all that they can be- including the goal, in fact the duty of each citizen of being a contributing member of society. This group would include educators, researchers, authors, parents, business people, and the public at large.

  3. Environment

    • Environmental Choice: Every environmental policy has human as well as financial costs and benefits, and We The People need full information to make informed choices. "Clean water, Clean air, Clean land" are not too much to expect in our country, in fact in our world! "He who pollutes pays" - the polluter should pay the price of full clean-up. A robust economy and a clean, biologically productive environment are not in conflict. On the contrary, they need each other over the long term if they are to continue to survive and prosper.

    • Anti-pollution standards should be drawn to protect EVERYONE in society as much as possible rather than be based on a safe threshold for healthy young adults. Inclusive instead of exclusive, so to speak.

    • The costs of regulation and the risks of the health threats that government is seeking to curb are important tools in setting environmental standards, but they are only tools, not ends in themselves. Many other factors are taken into consideration in reaching a final decision, not the last nor least of which is ethics.

    • We The People endorses the application of the "precautionary principle". Hence, when there is enough evidence to warrant concern that serious and/or irreversible environmental harm might occur, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as justification for blocking measures that are beneficial in their own right and would diminish the potential for experiencing such harm.

    • Consideration should be given to gradually replacing, or at least offsetting, the federal income tax with a tax on consumption.

    • Consumers might actively help curtail pollution by understanding and adopting active support and participation in the ZEV Program (Zero Emission Vehicles) which needs to stay on the books. The manufacturers are starting to withdraw the vehicles from the U.S. market (ie. Honda's electric car) due to slow sales. This is a question of education and information to the consumers and a national policy for the U.S. Federal government to purchase zero emission vehicles (eg. electric) for its huge fleet, thus creating a market and reducing the market cost by higher volume production. The environment can not make up for our lack of responsibility - if we adopt the "he who pollutes pays" policy, perhaps owners of traditional combustion engine vehicles will pay more instead of the owners of electric (or other environmentally sound) vehicles! We need to protect what we have or we will lose it!

  4. The Defense Budget, the Military and our Real National Security Needs- contrary to what our elected officials and the military are telling us, we hear from enlisted and recently retired officers that - its all about "pork", procurement, standards (standards which are across the board and not different for each service branch), and watching that defense contractors actually do what they are contacted to do, what they say they will do, actively monitoring their performance. Honesty, creative solutions to problems (ie. when equipment and parts are not easily available, being able to fix something without going through the procurement bureaucracy; or recognizing when a part can be purchased or repaired less expensively than by going through the often inflated pricing systems of the procurement offices), and personal responsibility are key to excellence - excellence in attitude, excellence in personal relations, and excellence in process, the flow of work and in the results achieved. Personal integrity and responsibility have slipped, and the military service is back in the attitude of the 1970's after Vietnam with cutbacks, layoffs, and reduction of services. There needs to be more standardization across the board - a return to a standard of excellence. This does not necessarily mean a higher budget, or even one at the level we have today. What is suggested is a return to responsibility, to remove "pork" at all levels, and a return to the highest standards of which we are capable.

  5. The Workers Prosperity Act: There is increasing disparity in our economic prosperity - the rich are getting richer, and the poor and middle class are getting poorer or "standing still". Why? Because $13 billion of new wealth is being created each year in America and only stockholders benefit in that new wealth. The Worker's Prosperity Act would help solve this problem by encouraging employee stock ownership and employee profit sharing. The Worker's Prosperity Act is proposed federal legislation that would create millions of new shareholders and high paying manufacturing jobs by requiring The Federal Reserve Bank (FED) to open a new low interest (0.5%) discount window designed to encourage Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs). The Act will also limit the interest rate markup (2.0%) on FED funds lent by commercial banks to ESOPs under this program. These loans will be made at an interest rate of 2.5% (0.5% plus 2.0%). The Act recognizes that economic and personal freedom requires a broad base of corporate owners, which in turn creates greater purchasing power among consumers - which is good for the rich as well as the expanding middle class. An Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) is a breakthrough method of corporate finance which creates new owners. Initiated into Federal Law by Senator Russell Long, it empowers all employees of a corporation by extending to them ownership rights and privileges. There are more than eleven million (11,000,000) members of Employee Stock Ownership Plans in the United States at this time. An ESOP provides working people who have little or no accumulated savings access to credit repayable out of future corporate earnings. It does this without any reduction in their paychecks. The corporation is allowed to repay both the principal and interest portions of the loan with pre-tax dollars while the employees are acquiring individual stock ownership in their company. The Worker's Prosperity Act would allow employees to buy and own a "piece of the action."

  • Jeffrey B. Peters Resume
  • Cici Peters Resume
  • Fact Sheet
  • Peters for President Flyer
  • Campaign Announcement Speech: 11/19/99

    Join We The People

    Jackson, NH 03846

    Site by Webbers Communications Design Studio.